MicrostockGroup

I loved those too until I figured that the webmaster uploaded it at 1,600px × 1,250px (click on the image) which will be indexed by Google and then your XS, S and M sales take a dive...

Write that webmaster and have them reduce the size to 800px width - they're in breach with the licensing terms!

I cannot seem to find the webmaster contact on this page- any ideas?

Thanks


Tom

I'd look for better "in uses".  That doesn't look like any kind of business site.

How do you find out where your picture has been used. I sold a couple of small images on Istock, would be cool to know where they have appeared.

Cheers,

Terry

swellphotographyuk.blogspot.com

And these http://www.helpster.de/themen/kartoffeln
Use Google images.

I personally don't find finding mine in thumb size on thrown together crappy loking sites too flattering, I'd rather not even bookmarks those, tho I don't find that much uses being semi-new to this. I also wouldn't want to show my models how their faces are being used on some poor looking thing.

Just drag and drop the picture (thumb) in the search field.

I'm using
http://www.google.nl/imghp?hl=nl&ie=UTF-8&tab=wi
and Chrome

That's strange, you mean you get no hits for the potatoes? I get 5.
Rightclicking still works for me btw.

Edit: I just checked and there is an extention active: "Search by Image (by Google)", guess you have to install that first

Ha, yeah, I just worked that out and was going to post and you posted first. Should have remembered you had to download the extnesion, it didn't come with Chrome.
I'm one of these people who shouldn't be allowed near a computer. 

I've just found one of my editorials on a web advertisement.
It's not the end of the world, and I guess it's unlikely I'd be sued, as the company apparently does business via the company on my editorial pic, but still, it's undoubtedly a commercial use.
Wonder what iStock will have to say? Actually, I'm really concerned about what they have to say, because although I think that particular usage isn't worrisome in itself, it is a clear breach of a serious rule.
Rules. Schmules. I've found many, many of my pics being used editorially without a credit, which is against the rules. I bet most downloaders don't even read the rules.

I found one of mine on a paperback book cover, no extended license, wrote and asked, apparently the ThinkStock license doesn't require that. Oh boy, I'm so proud to be on the cover of a training manual and I got a whole 25 cents.

As for Editorial, you did your part, the agency did theirs and the person who paid for the license is ultimately responsible for the final use. Micro agencies and sellers keep forgetting that. The way I see it, our licenses for Editorial are nothing more than a warning. With RF we are promising that it has a release. Two different things.

I should be able to put up a whole site, selling images as Editorial, every darn one of them and the buyer must determine if they are infringing or not. Not Me!  If someone comes to sue, we did our part. Done deal.